Jacques Ranciere

Aiming to rethink the relation between art and politics, this title seeks to reclaim aesthetics from its contemporary narrow confines to reveal its significance for contemporary experience. It ranges across art and politics, the uses and abuses of modernity, the role of visual technologies, and the relationship between history and fiction.

The Politics of Aesthetics

A brand new collection of Jacques Rancière's writings on art and politics.

On Politics and Aesthetics

Dissensus

Zihinsel Özgürlesme Üstüne Bes Ders

Cahil Hoca

From Almanac of Fall (1984) to The Turin Horse (2011), renowned Hungarian filmmaker Béla Tarr has followed the collapse of the communist promise. The “time after” is the time when we are less interested in histories and their successes or failures than we are in the delicate fabric of time from which they are carved.

Bela Tarr, the Time After

Slavoj Žižek

The Distribution of the Sensible

The Politics Of Aesthetics

Nasil Bir Zamanda Yasiyoruz

Jacques Rancière é um pensador que tem se destacado, nos últimos anos , por sua reflexão lúcida, sistemática sobre as relações entre estética e política na sociedade contemporânea. 'A partilha do Sensível' é uma introdução ao pensamento do autor. Em cinco breves capítulos, Rancière explicita conceitos-chave de seu pensamento, como o vínculo indissolúvel entre arte e política, e a pouca eficácia dos conceitos de modernidade, vanguarda e pós-modernidade para iluminar esse vínculo no presente.

partilha do sensível, A

Translated by Steven Corcoran Only yesterday aesthetics stood accused of concealing cultural games of social distinction. Now it is considered a parasitic discourse from which artistic practices must be freed. But aesthetics is not a discourse. It is an historical regime of the identification of art. This regime is paradoxical, because it founds the autonomy of art only at the price of suppressing the boundaries separating its practices and its objects from those of everyday life and of making free aesthetic play into the promise of a new revolution. Aesthetics is not a politics by accident but in essence. But this politics operates in the unresolved tension between two opposed forms of politics: the first consists in transforming art into forms of collective life, the second in preserving from all forms of militant or commercial compromise the autonomy that makes it a promise of emancipation. This constitutive tension sheds light on the paradoxes and transformations of critical art. It also makes it possible to understand why today?s calls to free art from aesthetics are misguided and lead to a smothering of both aesthetics and politics in ethics.

Aesthetics and Its Discontents

O que há em comum entre a prática louca de Dom Quixote e a racional teoria dos atos de ficção? Entre a arca de Noé e a teoria do romance? Nestes ensaios, Rancière faz uma reflexão sobre os nexos entre o discurso filosófico, a poética e a política.

Políticas da escrita

The theorists of art and film commonly depict the modern audience as aesthetically and politically passive. In response, both artists and thinkers have sought to transform the spectator into an active agent and the spectacle into a communal performance. In this follow-up to the acclaimed The Future of the Image, Rancière takes a radically different approach to this attempted emancipation. First asking exactly what we mean by political art or the politics of art, he goes on to look at what the tradition of critical art, and the desire to insert art into life, has achieved. Has the militant critique of the consumption of images and commodities become, ironically, a sad affirmation of its omnipotence?

The Emancipated Spectator

The global triumph of democracy was announced thirty years ago, promising an age of consensus in which the dispassionate consideration of objective problems would give birth to a world at peace. Today, these grand hopes have been destroyed, and the era touted as new and exceptional has turned out to be remarkably similar to the old order – but not simply due to the aggression of external forces. Instead, we must look to the nature of consensus itself, which, in the view of leading radical philosopher Jacques Rancière, is revealed as a violent, absolutized capitalist machine whose output is ever more inequality, exclusion and hate. This book delivers a frank and piercing assessment of the globalised capitalist consensus. The invasion of Iraq, the riots on Capitol Hill and the rise of the European far right all provide evidence of the consummation of consensual realism, as does the current state-sanctioned racism which exploits the disenchanted progressive tradition and is led by an intelligentsia that claims to be left-wing. At the same time, Rancière also praises the dynamism of social movements which affirm the power of the assembly of equals and its capacity for worldmaking: autonomous protest collectives have proven themselves capable of opening breaches in the consensual order and challenging the post-1989 system of domination.

Uncertain Times

It is frequently said that we are living through the end of politics, the end of social upheavals, the end of utopian folly. Consensual realism is the order of the day. But political realists, remarks Jacques Ranciere, are always several steps behind reality, and the only thing which may come to an end with their dominance is democracy. ‘We could’, he suggests, ‘merely smile at the duplicity of the conclusion/suppression of politics which is simultaneously a suppression/conclusion of philosophy.’ This is precisely the task which Ranciere undertakes in these subtle and perceptive essays. He argues persuasively that since Plato and Aristotle politics has always constructed itself as the art of ending politics, that realism is itself utopian, and that what has succeeded the polemical forms of class struggle is not the wisdom of a new millennium but the return of old fears, criminality and chaos. Whether he is discussing the confrontation between Mitterrand and Chirac, French working-class discourse after the 1830 revolution, or the ideology of recent student mobilizations, his aim is to restore philosophy to politics and give politics back its original and necessary meaning: the organization of dissent.

On the Shores of Politics

Following the previous volume of essays by Jacques Rancière from the 1970s, Staging the People: The Proletarian and His Double, this second collection focuses on the ways in which radical philosophers understand the people they profess to speak for. The Intellectual and His People engages in an incisive and original way with current political and cultural issues, including the “discovery” of totalitarianism by the “new philosophers,” the relationship of Sartre and Foucault to popular struggles, nostalgia for the ebbing world of the factory, the slippage of the artistic avant-garde into defending corporate privilege, and the ambiguous sociological critique of Pierre Bourdieu. As ever, Rancière challenges all patterns of thought in which one-time radicalism has become empty convention.

Staging the People Volume 2

The Intellectual and His People

The critique of modernist ideology from France's leading radical theorist In this book Jacques Rancière radicalises his critique of modernism and its postmodern appendix. He contrasts their unilinear and exclusive time with the interweaving of temporalities at play in modern processes of emancipation and artistic revolutions, showing how this plurality itself refers to the double dimension of time. Time is more than a line drawn from the past to the future. It is a form of life, marked by the ancient hierarchy between those who have time and those who do not. This hierarchy, continued in the Marxist notion of the vanguard and nakedly exhibited in Clement Greenberg’s modernism, still governs a present which clings to the fable of historical necessity and its experts. In opposition to this, Rancière shows how the break with the hierarchical conception of time, formulated by Emerson in his vision of the new poet, implies a completely different idea of the modern. He sees the fulfilment of this in the two arts of movement, cinema and dance, which at the beginning of the twentieth century abolished the opposition between free and mechanical people, at the price of exposing the rift between the revolution of artists and that of strategists.

Temporality in Art and Politics

Modern Times

How do we define politics? What is our role in the unfolding of the political? Moments Politiques finds Jacques Rancière, the legendary French philosopher, addressing these questions in essays and interviews drawn from thirty years of passionate public discourse. Reflecting on events from the Paris uprisings of May 1968 to the near present, and on his contemporaries including Michel Foucault, Guy Debord, and Roland Barthes, Rancière interrogates our understanding of equality, democracy, and the shifting definition of communism today. In these short, provocative, accessible pieces, we are asked to imagine a society where the “anarchic bedrock of the political” is precisely “the power of anyone.” This is a world of radical equality. It is a place where the student or factory worker’s opinion is equal to that of any banker or politician. To support these ideas, key concepts of Rancière’s political thought are introduced, such as his notions of dissensus and political performance, and his special definition of “police.” Moments Politiques stages unflinching confrontations with immigration law, new waves of racism, and contemporary forms of intervention. As ever, Rancière leads by example and breathes life into his argument that “dissent is what makes society liveable.”

Moments Politiques

In a brand new translation of a collection of writings, a noted French political philosopher explores the nature of consensus in contemporary politics.

Chronicles of Consensual Times

Jean Baudrillard

Various

Edward W. Said

Georg Lukacs

Etienne Balibar

Radical Thinkers Set 8 (Shrinkwrapped)

Louis Althusser

Pierre Macherey

Roger Establet

Kapitali Okumak

The politics of literature is not the same as the politics of writers and their commitments, nor does it concern the way writers represent social structures or political struggles. The expression ′politics of literature′ assumes that there is a specific connection between politics as a form of collective practice and literature as a historically determined regime of the art of writing. It implies that literature intervenes in the parceling out of space and time, place and identity, speech and noise, the visible and the invisible, that is the arena of the political. This book seeks to show how the literary revolution shatters the perceptible order that underpinned traditional hierarchies, but also why literary equality foils any bid to place literature in the service of politics or in its place. It tests its hypotheses on certain writers: Flaubert, Tolstoy, Hugo, Mallarmé, Brecht and Borges, to name a few. It also shows the consequences of this for psychoanalytical intepretation, historical narration and philosophical conceptualization.

Jacques Ranciere

About

Books

Join the club